Possibly off topic but I believe worthy of note, that article contains a blurb by Kristina Shapran, who's listed as dancing Swanhilda, correct?i can't quite cipher the machine translation, but it's good to see she's getting roles at the Stanislavsky!

I just listened to the old interview for the first time--I don't at all begrudge Polunin his search for freedom, self-realization etc.--I'm a lot older than he is and often have the same yearnings -- but listening to his ruminations I'm not convinced one can put much blame on the Royal's "lack of freedom" for his departure; he sounds like a very restless young man...If he had started at the Stanislavsky, then he might now be at the Royal...(I was mostly struck by his joke about changing countries--which is just what he has now done.)

As for the more recent interview: he describes Roland Petit giving him more choices dancing Petit's Coppelia than the Royal coaches gave him with the choreography he danced at the Royal. Well, the original choreographer is still there to guide him and tell him if he (the choreographer) doesn't like something Polunin tries out, so it's easier to grant the freedom in the first place. One hears similar stories re Balanchine telling dancers to do what they want w. their arms etc. But if I were a Royal coach guiding someone in the work of Petit or Balanchine or Ashton (!!!) -- well, of course I would be unlikely to let even a very talented 21 year old do what he wants with his hands as he says Petit did.

Anyway, will there really be "more freedom" at the Stanislavsky generally (not just when the choreographer is right there leading rehearsal) and would that even be a good thing? Maybe yes and maybe no; I couldn't venture a guess.

[Edited later to say that the translation confused me about Polunin working w. Petit--he did not. Annamicro made the correction below...]

As for the more recent interview: he describes Roland Petit giving him more choices dancing Petit's Coppelia than the Royal coaches gave him with the choreography he danced at the Royal. Well, the original choreographer is still there to guide him and tell him if he (the choreographer) doesn't like something Polunin tries out, so it's easier to grant the freedom in the first place.

Roland Petit died one year ago (July 10, 2011) and I don't remember that Sergei has ever worked with him, has anybody a different information? Maybe there is something wrong with the translation.

I just listened to the old interview for the first time--I don't at all begrudge Polunin his search for freedom, self-realization etc.--I'm a lot older than he is and often have the same yearnings -- but listening to his ruminations I'm not convinced one can put much blame on the Royal's "lack of freedom" for his departure; he sounds like a very restless young man...If he had started at the Stanislavsky, then he might now be at the Royal...(I was mostly struck by his joke about changing countries--which is just what he has now done.)

As for the more recent interview: he describes Roland Petit giving him more choices dancing Petit's Coppelia than the Royal coaches gave him with the choreography he danced at the Royal. Well, the original choreographer is still there to guide him and tell him if he (the choreographer) doesn't like something Polunin tries out, so it's easier to grant the freedom in the first place. One hears similar stories re Balanchine telling dancers to do what they want w. their arms etc. But if I were a Royal coach guiding someone in the work of Petit or Balanchine or Ashton (!!!) -- well, of course I would be unlikely to let even a very talented 21 year old do what he wants with his hands as he says Petit did.

Anyway, will there really be "more freedom" at the Stanislavsky generally (not just when the choreographer is right there leading rehearsal) and would that even be a good thing? Maybe yes and maybe no; I couldn't venture a guess.

[font=Verdana][size=3]A coach is a coach is a coach, especially if the ballet is “Cinderella” in which Sergei Polunin played the role for at least five performances.[/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=3]Over two years ago he was every inch a Prince in “Nutcracker” followed weeks later by his extraordinarily stylish Prince in “The Sleeping Beauty.” The following month he was the Prince in “Cinderella” where he gave a most stylish performance in a marvellous partnership with Yuhui Choe.[/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=3]Mr.Polunin successfully essayed the role of Aminta in “Sylvia” followed by the Prince in “Cinderella” on several occasions and a further performance of Aminta in “Sylvia”[/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=3]In the January of 2011 he danced “Albrecht” twice and in April there was a dream of a performance of “Cinderella” with Alina Cojocaru.[/size][/font][font=Verdana][size=3]This was followed by four more performances of “Cinderella.”[/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=3]In the Royal Ballet’s summer tour to the Far East he danced Albrecht with Marinella Nunez.[/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=3]Back in London he was a marvel in “Marguerite and Armand” with Tamara Rojo and again with Rojo and Lauren Cuthbertson.[/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=3]In the run up to Christmas 2011 he partnered Cuthbertson as Aurora on two or three occasions was the Prince to the Sugar Plum Fairy on several occasions and remained the choice of the Prince into January this year.[/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=3]That he had become a Prince of choice by Dame Monica Mason there is no doubt and with that responsibility and his confidence [/size][/font][font=Verdana][size=3]arising from his undoubted successes with audiences and critics,[/size][/font][font=Verdana][size=3]I see no fault in his choice of aesthetics as to the manner in which he wished to present himself on stage.[/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=3]Perhaps he even felt he deserved to be trusted?[/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=3]Mr. Polunin is undoubtedly a refined artist of the ballet, who it would appear, saw his career developing through his abilities to develop characterisations that both suited his physicality and his[/size][/font][font=Verdana][size=3]interpretations of the roles he performed[/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=3]I feel he had nothing to prove to anyone, repetiteur or coach. Such[/size][/font][font=Verdana][size=3]exceptions in performance had been allowed to other dancers in the past.[/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=3]The inner conflict was real, as Dame Monica Mason when asked about Mr Polunin sensitively explained in her talk given at Ivy House during the recent Pavlova celebrations. She described Mr Polunin as being something of an outsider in the school and the company.[/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=3]Thank goodness this never showed on stage and in over fifty years of watching ballet, all I can say, is thank goodness for the outsiders I have witnessed who were exceptional performers.[/size][/font]

[size=3][font=Verdana]As to your,” [font=Helvetica]Anyway, will there really be "more freedom" at the Stanislavsky.” Generally speaking it’s a possibility. Individual highly talented young dancers in Russia have frequently been given their head to allow personally found inner confidence to grow and often with a coach of either a paternal or maternal concern for their success.[/font][/font][/size]

[size=3][font=Verdana][font=Helvetica]On reflection it was his first performance as the Bronze Idol in "La Bayadere" back in 2007. that a hurried discussion took place among a group of older ballet goers in that we had all been struck as to the potentially significant dancer of the future, that the teenage Mr Polunin might become.[/font][/font][/size]

As for the more recent interview: he describes Roland Petit giving him more choices dancing Petit's Coppelia than the Royal coaches gave him with the choreography he danced at the Royal. Well, the original choreographer is still there to guide him and tell him if he (the choreographer) doesn't like something Polunin tries out, so it's easier to grant the freedom in the first place.

Roland Petit died one year ago (July 10, 2011) and I don't remember that Sergei has ever worked with him, has anybody a different information? Maybe there is something wrong with the translation.

You are exactly right--the translation misled me -- the English makes it sound as if Polunin is literally referring to Petit -- and my brain did not kick in to remind of the latter's death (though, when I read it, I was mildly surprised he was 'still alive!')...so my point about that is...uh...pretty null.

Leonid -- Polunin sounds quite extraordinary and perhaps his talent will indeed find a more comfortable home at the Stanislavsky...

[font=Verdana][size=3]The inner conflict was real, as Dame Monica Mason when asked about Mr Polunin sensitively explained in her talk given at Ivy House during the recent Pavlova celebrations. She described Mr Polunin as being something of an outsider in the school and the company.[/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=3]Thank goodness this never showed on stage and in over fifty years of watching ballet, all I can say, is thank goodness for the outsiders I have witnessed who were exceptional performers.[/size][/font]

There is a long list of outsiders on Mason book (to make just an example, the past year she denied Aurora to Cojocaru because, in her opinion, she didn't suite her Sleeping Beauty production...). One of her most famous outsider forced to leave, Sylvie Guillem, is giving here an answer and an advice to Polunin (at 23'10"). The interview is extremely interesting and also entertaining, but she is speaking (excellently) in Italian...

You are exactly right--the translation misled me -- the English makes it sound as if Polunin is literally referring to Petit -- and my brain did not kick in to remind of the latter's death (though, when I read it, I was mildly surprised he was 'still alive!')...so my point about that is...uh...pretty null.

I suppose I had the same translation as you , let's hope it is just Google fault and not in the original text!

During Mason's tenure as director of the RB hasn't been memorable for her treatment of personnel, the loss of Putrov and Polunin has harmed the company immeasurably and both these losses could have been averted. As for Sylvie Guillem, what logic or lack of it caused Mason to let go the biggest star in the world of ballet?

During Mason's tenure as director of the RB hasn't been memorable for her treatment of personnel, the loss of Putrov and Polunin has harmed the company immeasurably and both these losses could have been averted. As for Sylvie Guillem, what logic or lack of it caused Mason to let go the biggest star in the world of ballet?

This thread is not about Monica Mason, but thank God she's retiring.

I have a strong feeling that Putrov was fired by a long list of female colleagues more than from Mason. Anyway, as you said, thank God she is going (not competely), even if several years too late. Anyway many are already missing her: "she served the Company" they say.

During Mason's tenure as director of the RB hasn't been memorable for her treatment of personnel, the loss of Putrov and Polunin has harmed the company immeasurably and both these losses could have been averted. As for Sylvie Guillem, what logic or lack of it caused Mason to let go the biggest star in the world of ballet?

This thread is not about Monica Mason, but thank God she's retiring.

No lack of logic, like many other ballet goers I blame Sylvie Guillem along with several other dancers as having over time, a negative effect upon genuine aesthetic of Academic Classical Ballet, turning a high art into an entertainment in which certain members of the audience are thrilled by vulgarity.